instead of hating the corporate powers that have shifted overseas and completely forgot about you and made no a men's you hate the people below you, you hate women, -- >> guest: and yes i have great respect for that argument as well because i think that there is a kind of distraction going on very often and it's a very seductive distraction. >> host: so one of your most original chapters is about the rampage shooter and what we get wrong. you sort of reconceived the rampage shooter is but can you talk about? >> guest: the rampage school shooter. i also have a chapter on the guys that go postal. >> host: that's different. i named a young school shooters like columbine. >> guest: i'm flattered that you think i have a take on it and what you think that is. i will tell you what i think is new about it by the sociology of

it. all of the work on the school shooters, all of the research that has been done except one superb anthropologist who wrote a book called rampage, all of the ways we have approached them has been a focus on the psychology of the shooters. so you have the extreme psychology for example the member the work on columbine which basically is like looking at a painting really up close so you see the dots but you don't see a picture at all or its guns and violent videogames and marilyn manson and golf music and any number of these causes that lead to the these guys to explode. then you have those that were

bullied and constantly beat up. >> host: where is the end it all meant in that situation? >> guest: the additional part and i will get to the entitlement part, the additional piece i added is that it's not enough to profile the shooters. we also have to profile for schools. now, sandy hook is an exception. it wasn't a student coming into his school. since columbine, remember, since columbine, school shootings have taken a turn that occurred. you don't just go to school and try to kill as many of them as you can ask people did before: bind, remember those are still in jail, but you also kill your self at the end. this isn't suicide that this is suicide by mass murder.

you take out as many as you can because they have done you wrong end of the constant line that goes through -- >> host: explain it again -- >> guest: you have done us wrong. you've sand be tennis upcoming ignored us etc., you know, spread rumors about us, lied about us. what's interesting to -- i was thinking about this on the train ride down here that the rampage school shooters are an outlook us to the boys version of the girls who commits suicide after being relentlessly cyber bullied and a sean day an and all that t they can't take it anymore. the boys explode into the girls internalize. but it's a similar kind of dynamic. so it's not true that only boys bully. we know that's not true, but they have different kinds of responses to it. and so, you know, they feel

wronged and badly done by, they feel ignored like i will show you. i will get even with you. that is their logic. there are thousands of boys that are fueling this all the time. so why is it that school shootings are also horrifying in some ways seemingly irregular occurrence and also reasonably rare. 99% of schools haven't had one. why? because thousands of boys feel this every day in their basements and attics and bedrooms blowing up the galaxy on the computer wanting to take three then jammed why don't they? there you have to profile the schools and to say something about the schools in which these school shootings take place. they have certain characteristics. they are what one sociologist calls the -- jockocity. there was one who played his hummer in a 15 minute zone and

the rule of the school and the administration and faculty covered with them. you take the case of steubenville ohio not that long ago. these athletes if you remember what happened, this is what entitlement sounds like. they gang raped this girl and they filmed it and one of them got worried and set it to the other one you know, we can get in trouble with this. and the other one said don't worry the coach will take care of us and sure enough what did the coach to? that day he did immediately what he said. he questioned why she was there, what she was drinking, whether she led them on -- >> host: we've had several cases like this -- >> guest: how did the city deal with this absolutely horrific response by the coach? they'd be higher to him. so we are not talking about steubenville now we are talking about the entire town rallied behind the coach that runs interference for the players. this football player was right.

he was entitled and everything worked out as he expected it would. so my feeling is that is what i want to interact. >> host: i understand that. it's a different point than the rest of the book because those jocks can also enter the entitlement. that is a phenomenon where in other places those could be rick at the gun show. but it's like old-fashioned -- >> guest: that is really interesting because the athletes, the homecoming kings, they also feel that they have entitlement. they would tell me we are walking around with targets on our back. everyone is looking to get us. we are the poor victims here.

>> host: everyone wants to be a victim. like the relationship between the shooters and the jocks that you described, that could have taken place in many decades. it's like the entitlement. it's more just what happens to those that's the newest thing where everyone feels he just can't make it. and then my only other response to that chapter is it didn't seem to me to choose between technology and sociology. they are both whatever. you have sociology and then people interact which makes them crazy. >> guest: i think that sociology provides that context and psychology provides the insight into the individual behavior. why this person and not this person in that context. >> host: a section of the book i appreciated because i've been curious and edited many is the third row take on the men's rights movement because i think there's a lot of confusion about

this. you have the sense that they are very angry but tha that they hae legitimate grievances and they are sort of an old history to it but it was very useful to put all of those together and kind of separate those in the way you did. so maybe i will start with a historthehistory which was quito me. can you talk about the origin and where it comes from? >> guest: i locate the origins of the men's rights movement and the guide's response in the 1970s to the beginning of the women's feminist movement. there were a lot of men who -- but the feminism basically challenged was what was called by the social ecology is the role that you have to be nice, pretty, quiet, you know and do all this and women would say that's not who we are, we are assertive, we are confident, we want to do stuff and we don't

want to sacrifice any of that nice nurturing stuff either. we want to be moms and all that stuff. we want to do it all. so men basically were saying -- and the women in our lives were all like becoming feminists and critiquing our own behavior and so a lot of them said wealth they are right. women have the raw deal. so have we. you can never express your feelings, you can ever top people that you love them. all of your relationships with men are completely restricted by homophobia and the terror that other people might get the wrong idea about you, whatever. so being a man sucks, too and just as much into some would say that it sucks more. it comes from what was then called the men's liberation movement that man needed liberation from the constricted

opera sir role three at. >> host: surveyed sympathetic. >> guest: initially. >> host: that was interesting. >> guest: it was sympathetic to feminism but there was also -- as one became angry -- and there is still a men's liberation movement in polls that is independent of feminism, but that is basically ceded. what has emerged right is the movement that basically the men's rights movement takes as it is true the same thing i often hear from my female students which is when i come to my classes and i started to live the history of the gender revolution by students say while feminism, that was your generations issue. we won. thank you so much, but we don't have to worry about that now.

we can do whatever we want. the women see this. because they haven't been in the workplace yet. five years after they graduate they are like you were right. but before that o they think feminism is over. that we don't need to deal with that. we can have sex, drink, like sports, go to law school. we are fine. and the men have the same critique and a funny way. they basically think feminism has been so victorious that women have basically taken over and there are several ways in which the men's rights movement and braces many of the original claims of men's liberation. for example, around men's health. now before they get angry and say that there is too much funding for breast cancer and about prostate cancer come up before they get there they say the traditional finish of masculinity means you are basically indifferent to health concerns. men do not go to the doctor as often for the routine screenings etc. all of those health issues are

true and they come from a critique of the men spectrum and to that extent i think the men's movement has positive things to offer particularly about health and stress related diseases and how masculinity leads to -- that part i agree with that somehow because women have taken over the medical establishment and ththere's all thisthe result isr prostate cancer, i think not. or no funding for prostate cancer. but i don't blame women for this but i do think that is a reasonable critique. and so that is one thing. i think the major tributary that feeds the river on the men's rights movement has to do with fatherhood and the fathers rights movement. >> host: is that a minor strain or separate strand? why did the fathers rights movement come to a socially i

think it is that earnest about divorce, overwhelming amounts of bitterness about divorce. >> host: the only e-mails i don't answer because they are so vile that it's shocking. so where does that -- how does that come about? >> guest: i think it's understandable. in the 70s, the critique of the mail rule was that it enabled then o order in some was inspired men to become more involved fathers but since we are the men's liberation and women's liberation movement actually coincided with you today would say we need you to be better fathers and do fair work. we want to go to work. and it's good for you, too. men took that seriously and started to think about. think about your own husband. my father had to fight and lost to be in the delivery room when

i was born. >> host: that explains a lot about you. >> guest: they wouldn't let him in. now if the man is married to the woman giving birth -- >> host: and he stopped there he is a jerk. >> guest: 95% of men. it's changed. men are far more involved in childcare. and kind of like it. so what happened since the 70s and this is why there was a trickle of stuff about fatherhood that grew into an ocean of positive that all these beautiful things to involve fatherhood and the daddy and me stuff. it's great. but what happened is those men became more involved and more active fathers and the law didn't change. the court system thinks of them as our father's generation. the court system exerts them as

wallets. the court system thinks of them as utterly involved married to their jobs and doesn't acknowledge that they have had more input. so when they come to the custody decision they feel like why did i put in all of this work and all of this effort and all of this stuff only to lose everything? a little reality is helpful here because the majority of the custody cases are not untested. it's not a case where i want joint and you want a soul. it's most of the time and in fact about 80% of cases the husband and wife agree on custody prior to the court date. >> host: and agree which direction like the wife has primary -- >> guest: usually it is joint or she has sole physical and he has visitation. but there are occasionally -- there are one out of five cases there really is some conflict. he wants joint and she wants a soul, he wants a soul and she

wants -- whatever. he wants more than she wants him to have. and in those cases the courts tend to side -- here i think as much as the father likes data has some validity that most of the time the court seems to side with her. i have an analyst is that suggests it may not be all that wrong. there are a lot of cases coming a lot of extenuating circumstances. when they say know there's all kind of charges of violence in the home which is also quite pervasive. there tends to be some correlation with this type of custody cases, you know whatever. but what i'm saying is by and large the anger that fuels a lot of the fathers meant right groups is the sense that we changed the institutions habits and so they are furious at courts, judges, lawyers but also at their ex-wives so there's an antifeminist strain but it's not the whole thing.

i think of all of the chapters in the book i actually think that the fathers rights have a legitimate right. >> host: i've always suspected that. somewhere is a legitimate gripe. >> guest: all of the groups i talk about in my book have a legitimate gripe i think they are just taking and delivering the angry mail to the wrong address. >> host: a legitimate constitutional gripe, how is that? there are some which are not -- it hasn't met with the current error or something like that from an institution that hasn't moved forward. >> guest: the reason that i'm critical of courses that i think that they are in the reversal of the data into simply loopy but most of the time -- and i do get the anger especially the fathers who think we changed, the institutions haven't and that's

wrong. we are entitled. >> host: there was a very funny quote that you have to buy a kid i think it was a friend of yours who had been a supervisor and the kid decide to say that u spend any time with your dad? he's so busy working on his dad's rights movement. [laughter] so i want to return to their rage against women because you end on this very chapter -- depressing chapter who shoots at the gym because he can't get a date -- there's a toxic rage building. we will end on a more hopeful note band that but there is a toxic rage. some of the e-mails that you quote as i said it's kind of uncomfortable to read the e-mails that the men's rights bt guys and the letters of the shooters. just a sense of anger against women that's kind of hard to

take. so what do you do with that? like where does that come from and what do you do with that? >> guest: i think that a lot of guys have felt personally sort of by the changes in women's lives around sexual empowerment and entering into the court place -- workplace i think that the emotions underneath the anger are that the field confused and bewildered and just kind of have to see. these are unstable emotions. they make you feel like you can't get your foot in and i think that ander is a way to sort of stabilize yourself. now come in the case who is the lead of the chapter on the agreement -- >> host: he's the one who shot up the women at the gym. >> guest: in his testimony he said he hadn't had sex in years,

haven't had a date, there's all these gorgeous women come he's not a bad looking guy and he's not if you look at the picture -- >> host: it's depressing. >> guest: it breaks your heart that, you know a lot of guys think about -- the angry white men who are learning to be successful pickup artists. the whole genre of how to become a pickup artist, how to get women to -- i remember when i was a kid there were these pheromone-based colognes if you put them on the women couldn't stay away. you are guaranteed to get some tonight. and all the strategies. a friend of mine has done some research on how guys prepare for going out for bars and stuff like that with their friends. how do you go out to a bar in which the chances of you actually having sex tonight with someone you pick up our less

than 5%. how do you prepare for failure every single weekend? and so there is a kind of resentment, a kind of anger. and then there's all this confusion because women have refused to sacrifice their femininity for being competent in the workplace. they want to be taken seriously as women and as workers. so they are beautiful, they are sexy, they tell us they like that but how come the botany? so i get that. i could understand that anger and i feel that they feel a resentment -- >> host: but it's two things that struck me, one is you read it and what he's saying them incorrectly but you see his logic i'm doing everything i need to do to be a man and it's not working. it's all superficial. he's saying i'm wearing this, i

am working out, i'm doing all these things and it's utterly failing. >> guest: i'm doing these things that you would then -- >> host: it's like the chevrolet commercial i quoted in my book that ran in the super bowl one year where you have these men that say i picked up your laundry, i felt your lipstick. it's like the men are completely frozen. like you've done all this to me. >> guest: and i get to drive a car. >> host: but the other thing -- >> guest: to let you know how i know the commercial didn't necessarily work on you because it was a dodge challenger. >> host: my mom had a dodge challenger. the other thing -- were supposed to get over that.

my husband said when i was in middle school you always felt like the girls had something and you couldn't. that is the feeling you're just not supposed to have it when you're 40. you're supposed to understand the world in a more sophisticated way. that's the other thing that struck me sad it's like the thoughts of a 14-year-old boy, not a 40-year-old man. >> host: . >> guest: let's take that for a second. let's put him back 26 years. twenty-six years ago he was right. twenty-six years ago a 40-year-old would have been right to think that. you see what i'm saying? but basically you are right to say this. that he embraces this idea that when i'm 40 i will have all of these things. so it's regressive. a lot of this is out of regret. some of the guys i quote at the beginning of the book, they are taking away our country, it's all very nostalgic but he was

right 24 years ago. that seems to me to be the key. things have changed that quickly. so you can't rely on -- you're not don draper. they don't exist any longer. >> host: don draper can go to work him u, but on perfume and t many girls. right. we have a few minutes left so i went and -- this is the hardest part. everyone asks me this about my book. you have these men who are feeling and angry. the kind of what can you do question. we all raised at the end of the book like what can you do when you've got this sort of bubbling rage on the radio and online and with life. how do you address these men that are suffering and falling off the map in many ways as fathers and workers in all sorts of ways so they may not be right

and entitled to their entitlement and yet they are suffering. so a couple things they can do -- >> guest: it also defines both of our posture. you know, you and i disagree somewhat in some respects but we also run on parallel lines into one of the things that is similar between yours and mine is that we have a significant amount of compassion for these that are suffering. we recognize that. what i say is that their pain is real but it's not necessarily true. they are feeling real feelings and anger of course is the one feeling then are allowed to feel so they are feeling real feelings but it doesn't match up with what i understand to be the data. >> host: how do you convince them it's not a black woman next to her job? >> guest: first of all, look it is a done deal. do you think that women are going to have a moment where they are going to go my god, got

to go back home. this driving cars, having orgasms, let's go back to the accused to be. >> host: the corporations like we should have left that. >> guest: but that's not happening. good point. so, the ship sailed. the question is are we going to get on board or are we going to swim after it. here is where we have something to offer the data on the men i making it a big movement. but actually it is a declining number of men because most men, you know maybe your husband in fact -- most of my friends have very quietly accommodated themselves to the gender ecology and the relationships and families and you know what? they don't hate it in fact they like it. they like having somebody to talk to that is smart and interesting. they like having those kind of

relationships with their kids. they are actually feeling better about themselves to the men who share housework and childcare are more likely to go through routine screening but less likely to end up in the er and to go to therapists and be diagnosed with depression. they are less likely to be diagnosed with adhd. so here's what i would say. the answer to your question is on the one hand the deal is done. on the other hand, you know what, it's actually better. your life will improve. that's on a personal site. on the political side we have to say what institutional constraint would have prevented us from living the lives we want to live? how about adequate healthcare. how about universal child care for our children? >> host: they would've laughed in your face. they just have to get used to them. >> guest: but my feeling is if enough of them keep saying this,

i'm sure this is part of what was happening in our backyards last weekend, you know, the likely next mayor of the city of new york has proposed universal child care to be paid for by taxing the wealthy. okay, probably won't happen but it's on the agenda. someone's talking about it. eventually, eventually we are going to end up looking a little bit more like the rest of europe, like the rest of the industrialized world. >> host: i put a lot of faith into the slow gradual personal experience. he watched tv and to see a lot of guys taking care of their children within two or three years ago. it's on mainstream sitcoms. everyone has their own show with a guy with kids. it seems more normal. you're out of work and end up picking your kids up from school created a situation o that a lot of men these days. you slowly acclimate. slowly we acclimate. >> guest: all i'm saying is

like in the corporation to see that you want on-site childcare we've always thought of that as a women's issue. it's not. it's a parents issue. when men to come out as parents we are going to say here's what i want. and of course women won't get it unless band supported to back. it's actually in the men's interest. that is a different argument than saying difficult because the ship has sailed. that may be true but i want them to feel motivated to work this. i think that as you say, the quiet accommodation is the biggest trend. and as the most dominant one, it has that kind of a rippling effect, and i think that's terrific because you see that all over the country that -- all over the country. this is that a regular blue state or purple states things. this is across-the-board men are spending more time with their kids. they are valuing them to do so

again you know, in parentheses the courts are going to have to recognize this. >> host: let's end on that optimistic note. it's been a pleasure. congratulations on your book. >> guest: thank you. .. >> click on the upper right side

of the page. next, newt gingrich argues that we are at the dawn of great breakthroughs in medicine and transportation and technology and other fields. but he warned that this may not be reached if we allow the government and other gatekeepers to get in the way. this is about one hour and 10 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> one thing, i have to say is that he knows how to give an entrance. plus, i must apologize because we were on an airplane, which was going to land in plenty of time and then i learned that it wasn't going to leave. a. [laughter] and so i do want to say a brief commercial for american airlines, it was another airplane, but they, instead of flying direct, they had 80 plane

through dallas and they went overboard because here and make the connection here, the barely legal connection in dallas. they did everything that they could be to be helpful. so we are on the way here now. so we apologize when we are running late and always enjoy having a chance to see you and we hope that we can get a picture or say something and i don't think that i quite realize that it had been 12 times since we've been here. but it has always meant a lot to me to come here. the first presidential campaign i got involved and was in was the nixon campaign. for those of you that may despair of the republicans in california, in georgia in 1960, the number of people who are

willing to campaign for richard nixon or for any republican was a remarkably small number. this includes the seat that we had in the mountain that are a function of the civil war. so as you can see, my career has been a series of climbing mountains and that is one of the longest political nights of my life it was a remarkably close election. and i'm glad to be here. i am here talking about american exceptionalism. it is aimed at teaching 48 year olds about american exceptionalism and history, something that we tragically find more and more that people are not learning in school.

then we watched about lincoln and tomorrow's 150th anniversary of what might have been one of the most important speeches in history and the most important speeches in human history. and then a breakout and talking about this is the culmination going back to 1958, trying to understand what we need to do. my dad was stationed in france and someone had to take responsibility for understanding what america had to do for learning how to explain it that the american people will give you to do it and i think that it is a very important model and its one of the most important books i've written to really say

toutle, this is as close to the same and here is what we have to do, be an exceptional nation. if you do think it's important, i hope that you will use facebook and twitter and e-mail addresses, and try to spread the word. so on this scale of this change, it can only come from the grassroots up and that will never come from sacramento or washington and it is impossible to have them to voluntarily disarm this. and they are simply not going to do it. the only way to you will get the change is to run over them by the american people where they have no choice and so a little bit of that 139 democrats suddenly decided that republican congressman fred upton had a terrific idea. [applause] [laughter] [appl]